I agree - I don't care if they use the May election date, the DNC should cover every penny it costs. They elected not to accept the primary we held and paid for, so it's up to them to make it right. And I don't want to hear any crap about "disenfranchising young voters". Howard Dean threw their votes on the floor, he needs to pay for it... :stan3::miff:

YEAH like thats going to happen. Thats the liberal Democrats for you spending your money like always. Oh let me correct myself WASTING your money. I almost thought some Democrats had actually grown a set of balls, but no, lets spend more money and have another primary.
Here are some facts #1 The Democrats made the decission to have the primary in January. #2 The Democrats are the one's requiring a second primary at the voters expense. No reserch is required to know this. In this particular election I don't know how anybody could support the Democrat's, they seem to be in such a termoil and continue to make bad decissions.
But thats O.K. because They don't like George Bush and that's all you need.

I've never understood why the tax payers should have to pay for any primaries. Shouldn't it be up to the parties to decide how to decide who represents the party in the general election and pay for the process?

just currious but wouldnt it be to jennys advantage to have had the primary w/o obama on the ticket since she is gaurenteed a spot on hillarys dream team if god forbid she is elected prez

that of course would be the only good out of that annoying biotch being prez is that jenny wouldnt be our gov anymore
she could f up the rest of the states to level the playing field?
remember that 5 years youll be blown away statement
seems like its playing into coming true

So, if this happens, I am voting for Obama. I previously voted for McCain; I think it is my duty now to go out and do what I can to keep Hillary out.

Except most polls are finding Hillary, not Obama, to be the weaker candidate in the general election. Either way be careful, you might end up being responsible for putting one of them in the white house.

I say let it play out. If Hillary doesn't take Michigan (Florida is the same story), those who supported Hillary will think she was robbed. If Hillary takes it, those who supported Obama will think he was robbed. The losers will argue that the redo should not have been done and shouldn't count. That makes for a lot of angry Democrats who will probably end up voting for another party.

Even if Michigan and/or Florida don't tip the scales enough, the Democrats face the same problem with the super delegates making the decision. With no clear winner in the popular vote, a lot of angry voters who think that their candidate should have been the winner will take their vote to the Republicans or an independent.

It's not a good situation for the Democrats no matter what happens now.

Carl Levin is the guy who's been pushing this for 10 years. He is the one to blame.

He's had an axe to grind with Bill Gardner for years, and good ol' 11% approval rating levin thought he finally won the battle.

Wonder why Levin isn't taking any of the blame here, he got out of this pretty easily..

I am not confused about the sponsors of the bill, or the voting record of the state senate.

I did not make any statement over what is in peoples minds and on their agendas. Regardless, this was still a Republican sponsored bill, not sure how you can argue that since it is part of the public record.

And for those that do not know, Carl Levin is a Senator in Washington, he has no vote in the state legislature where this particular vote was held.

I am not confused about the sponsors of the bill, or the voting record of the state senate.

I did not make any statement over what is in peoples minds and on their agendas. Regardless, this was still a Republican sponsored bill, not sure how you can argue that since it is part of the public record.

And for those that do not know, Carl Levin is a Senator in Washington, he has no vote in the state legislature where this particular vote was held.

Pete, The bill you're referencing clearly gives the "political leaders" the opportunity to set their affiliated party's primary to the date they see fit. That bill set the date for January 29th, but left it open for the party to change it.
After the bill was passed, the democrat's used that bill's new guidelines to adjust their primary to january 15th,Ahead of NH's primary. If they would have stuck with the bill's recommended date of the 29th, they would have been in line with party rules, the delegates would have been seated, and I wouldn't be wasting my time with this post.

So I'm not sure how you can possibly blaim the republican's for giving the democrat's the right to make themselves cost us tax payer money. But if you want to look at it that way, more power to you.

And don't get me started on this hack of a congressman levin. He's 100% pure jackass. Flip flops more then any other politician. Yes, he is a senator in washington, but he does represent and is an active MICHIGAN law maker.

If you take what CC said out of the equation, that the bill was within DNC rules, it's still a silly situation to have a re-vote. Even though the state bill was, as PeteC states, republican proposed, if it were against DNC regulations, the democratic state senators still had the opportunity to vote against it. We also have a democratic governor, who has veto power, afaik.

This is made even more absurd by the fact that everyone knew WELL ahead of time that the democratic primary here would be unusable, but no one really had a problem with it then. It's only now that both democratic possibles are at war that they are saying "oh, shit, maybe we shouldn't have done that."

The fact is bill 0624 designates Jan 15 as the date for the primary in 2008.
The fact is bill 0624 was sponsored solely by Republicans.
The fact is both Democrats and Republicans voted for and against.

The rest of it, well that is the debate that the rest of you are having.

OH, latest I have heard is the Democrats are trying to have this re-do without taxpayer funds if possible. If they do use tax payer funds I will not be happy either.

I do not agree with what the Democrats have done. I am simply trying to make sure that everyone knows where this all stems from.

Oh, as far as Levin flip flopping, I would rather have a politician willing to change his opinion given new information than stay the course with old and bad information. Just my opinion. (p.s. He is another career politician that should start thinking about retirement. But he still seems to get the votes from THE PEOPLE)

Bringing clarity to the world, one post at a time (grumpy sarcasm for ScOoTeR)